Disclaimer

The content of this blog is my personal opinion only. Although I am an employee - currently of Imagination Technologies's MIPS group, in the past of other companies such as Intellectual Ventures, Intel, AMD, Motorola, and Gould - I reveal this only so that the reader may account for any possible bias I may have towards my employer's products. The statements I make here in no way represent my employer's position, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of my employer. In fact, this posting may not even represent my personal opinion, since occasionally I play devil's advocate.

See http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcxddbtr_23cg5thdfj for photo credits.

Tuesday, April 05, 2016

Some Reasons Why I Seldom Eat at the Sweet Tomatoes Salad Bar Restaurant

Nothing major.  I am just fascinated by how minor details influence what I like and do not like. Introspection to try to optimize.

---

I think I have figured out why I dislike eating at Sweet Tomatoes: 

(1) no protein toppings for salads. Not even tofu, let alone chicken, turkey, or steak.  I make do with chili (beans and ground beef), but then I don't visit again for a year or two.

(2) I drink tea: hot tea, a teabag in hot water. No milk or sugar. It irritates me greatly that your restaurant charges me 2.49$ for this - for a teabag that I pay 5 cents for, or seldom more than 40 cents for premium teas much better than you have for sale. Sure, you wash the mug - but by that argument you should charge for a glass of water.  If I could bring my own tea in, in a travel mug, I would be much likelier to eat at your restaurant. As it is, I have the choice of eating a meal at your restaurant with expensive but lousy tea, or eating at a foodcart, good food but not so much salad, with my choice of beverage.

BACKGROUND: I work in a building right across the street from the a Sweet Tomatoes restaurant, 4 years, and yet I have only visited twice, in my first week. I was on my way to my normal lunch place - Pita Pit - when I thought to myself "Why don't I like eating at Sweet Tomatoes"? So I decided to try you today, to figure out if I could find a meal that I enjoy at your restaurant.

Now, I like me salads - although I dislike lettuce, I love spinach, and your other vegetables are acceptable (eg today I had broccoli cabbage, beets (love beets!), quinoa, garbanzos, carrots and sunflower seeds. Vinegar. 

But I like a bit of protein.  E.g. ar Pita Pit, my favorite lunch place, I usually have a strong me beef or chicken, with a pile of vegetables comparable to what I got today at Sweet Tomato.  No cheese - fork style, i.e. without the pita bread, this is basically a salad. With two differences from a salad at Sweet Tomato: the protein, and I the fact that I have the meat, the onions, peppers, and mushrooms warmed up on grill.  I can live without the warming up - I mention it just in passing - but I really like the protein. Satiates me, so I do not get hungry until dinner.

In my mind Sweet Tomato is not a "healthy salad" restaurant; instead I think of your restaurant as a "junk food" place, because of the pizza slices and pasta and dessert and muffins and...  The stuff I try to avoid eating, but which I might eat because the salad is insufgicienyly satiating or filling.

Now I understand that serving bits of grilled steak at a buffet might not fit your business model. Which is why I mention tofu.


Apart from this - well, in conjunction with this, the relatively minor annoyance of 100x markups on a cup of tea are the last straw.

Thursday, March 31, 2016

Notify only on the device you are closest to

I have disabled notifications for nearly everything except email from my VIP list - but I still get too many notifications.



E.g. just right now, I received an email from somebody I work closely with.



It beeped on my MacBook.



It beeped on my iPhone.



It buzzed on my Pebble Watch.



I prefer to get notifications on my watch.  I find the buzzing on my wrist much less objectionable than the sound that I need to grab my attention on my MacBook. Ditto iPhone.  And it is much easier to look at my wristband, even if I have to scroll, than to pull my iPhone out of my pocket.



Yeah, I know I can disable the notifications on my MacBook and on my iPhone. I have done that in the past.  But this is suboptimal when I have forgotten to wear my watch - rare, but sometimes happens.  Similarly, I much more often forget my iPhone.



I want notifications on my wrist (for only the important subset), when I am wearing my watch.  When I am not wearing my watch but when I have my iPhone in my pocket, I want notifications on my iPhone.  When neither my smartwatch nor my mobile phone is nearby, I want notifications on my laptop.



I.e. I want the device to which the active notification is delivered to be based on whichever devices I am closest to.



Failing that, distance:  if my watch is being worn, notify my watch.  If my iPhone is more than 6 feet away from my watch, buzz my iPhone.  If my MacBook is not near either my watch or my iPhone, buss my MacBook.



The last may be a problem, because while my watch is usually paired to my iPhone, if the iPhone is misplaced my watch has no way of telling the laptop that it is nearby.   TANSTAAFL - you can't have everything.











There are lots of articles on the web about notification overload.  Choosing one:



Zombification from notifications: How to fix the problem of too many alerts | VentureBeat | Mobile | by Shruti Gandhi:



'via Blog this'



Choosing this one because the poster talks about "OS level mindfulness", and how contextual awareness alone is not the answer.



She's close - but it has to be trans-OS, if you think of the watch/phone/laptop as having separate OSes.



Or it can be OS-level --- when we have an OS that is trans-device --- when any of your devices can be managed from any of your other devices.



I would prefer trans-OS, since I would prefer to be able to have different devices from different vendors.



But trans-device OS integration may be easier for a suitably motivated company to get right.



I think that this is what happened way back in the PC software market, when people realized that they wanted their word processor to talk to their spreadsheet to talk to their presentation software to talk to their database to talk to their email to talk to their calendar...   What they wanted an application suite or integration.   Providing that was one of the things that allowed Microsoft to become so big - the Office suite (Word/Excel/PowerPoint/...) apps were not individually the best, but they were good enough, and the fact that they worked together pretty well was enough to give Microsoft dominance, and drive nearly all SW vendors away from these apps, on Windows at least.    Email and calendaring were slow to arrive at Microsoft, but eventually Outlook got there.



I think that integrating software across multiple devices - watch / phone / laptop, possibly also earphones, web and cloud based - may be a similar  opportunity for whoever can do a good job of doing trans-device integration to displace the large number of not very well integrated apps that we have now.



I don't know that Microsoft will be able to repeat this integration.  But I think that the company did it once before, and I am not aware of anyone else having ever done so.



I suspect that Apple does not want to do trans-devices-from-different-vendors. Apple may want and be able to do this for all of the devices that it sells.



It is hard to see how small startups can play in this space, since they need to be an many different platforms.

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Back to the future: RCS

I have long been frustrated by the poor support for nested repositories in all version control systems that I am aware of:  Mercurial, Git, Bazaar...



Yeah, yeah, Git 2.8 has better submodules support.   Mercurial has subrepos. Blah, blah, blah.



My problem with all of these that I have looked into in detail is that they require a posteriori identification of a module.  And there is overhead at the root of a modules.



Whereas I have, for many years, maintained a personal source code tree where nearly any subdirectory tree and any time can be cloned, and used independently.  I do this because I want to use arbitrary libraries of my own in arbitrary other projects - e.g. my employer does not want me to insert my entire library tree into any source code of theirs, not if I just have too random libraries from disconnected places in my tree.  I also try to structure my libraries so that the minimum necessary can be imported.



TBD: Insert anecdote about discussing this with Linus - after his explanation, he said "Yeah, you need to add a porcelain to git."



But not just a porcelain. I do not usually want the whole history of the whole repository, all the way up to its root.  Usually I want only the subdirectory tree history (with provision for files in the subdirectory that may have been moved, i.e. that may have history, outside the tree).



And often I do not want the history at all, just a pointer to the repo.



E.g. today: I want to import one of my libraries for the umpteenth time into a project at work.



Way back when I started doing this regularly, my personal source code tree was CVS, as was my company's.  You can make a CVS directory be a symlink to outside CVSROOT, and it works pretty well. (Except that the company history doesn't have its own history of my tools.)



I have not found an equally satisfactory system since I gave up CVS.



Oftentimes, I use two VCS in the same module:



My company may be using Perforce, /p4/workspace/project



My library may be in ~glew/src/lib/a/b/glewlibXX, under Mercurial (or git, or bzr, or...)



and I clone my library using my VCS to the company workspace



Possibly in

/p4/workspace/project/users/glew/src/lib/a/b/glewlibXX



But preferably in a better location, like

/p4/workspace/project/external-dependencies/glewlibXX



I check all of the files into the company repo (perforce).



When I edit, I check into the company repo using the company VCS, e.g. perforce.  If I am allowed, I also check into the my personal repo using my VCS, e.g. hg.



If the company wants, they can pull updates that I have made to my personal library from my VCS into their VCS.  And so on.



If I am using a DVCS, this creates a history, typically

/p4/workspace/project/external-dependencies/glewlibXX/.hg



This wastes diskspace, since the company has its history in their depot, and I have my history in mine.  But we don't care about diskspace any more, right?



It's a minor pain, since I have to remember to push history from

/p4/workspace/project/external-dependencies/glewlibXX/.hg

to

~glew/src/lib/a/b/glewlibXX,

in addition to having to checkin to the company repo.

I can automate that.



A bigger annoyance is the question: does the cloned module's history and metadata,

/p4/workspace/project/external-dependencies/glewlibXX/.hg,

get checked into the parent repo?  I.e. is there a history of the history?

I have tried it many both ways.  Either way has problems









Anyway: frustrated, I have been thinking about going back to what worked well..



I was considering going back to CVS, since as I mention above it is fairly easy to link CVS directories.





The annoyance there is that CVS requires CVSROOT.  And I would prefer not to go back to having a full CVS repo.









Anyway: frustrated, I have been thinking about the simplest possible thing.



If not CVS, then next simplest is RCS.  (Or maybe SCCS, but I would rather not think about that.)







I.e. I am considering using RCS, only for this submodule sharing.    I would be using a different VCS for my master, and the company would continue to use its own.



I.e,. RCS might be just the VCS for fine grain submodule sharing.







I will use comments to this post to record further thoughts and issues.





































Sunday, March 27, 2016

Judicial Watch: State Department Documents Show that NSA Rebuffed Hillary Clinton’s Attempts to Obtain a Secure Blackberry

Conservative website Judicial Watch continues to chase Hillary Clinton's use of a personal email server:
Judicial Watch: State Department Documents Show that NSA Rebuffed Hillary Clinton’s Attempts to Obtain a Secure Blackberry - Judicial Watch: "“These documents show that Hillary Clinton knew her Blackberry wasn’t secure.  Then why did she use it to access classified information on her illicit email server?"
'via Blog this'
But from my point of view, items earlier in their own post explain the real story:
[W]e began examining options for S [Secretary Clinton] with respect to secure “Blackberry-like” communications … the current state of the art is not too user friendly, has no infrastructure at State and is very expensive…each time we asked the question “What was the solution for POTUS?” we were politely told to shut up and color. 
the issue here is one of personal comfort … S [Secretary Clinton] does not use a personal computer so our view of someone wedded to their email (why doesn’t she use her desktop when in SCIF?) doesn’t fit this scenario … during the campaign she was urged to keep in contact with thousands via a BB … once she got the hang of it she was hooked … now everyday [sic], she feels hamstrung because she has to lock her BB up … she does go out several times a day to an office they have crafted for her outside the SCIF and plays email catch up … Cheryl Mills and others who are dedicated BB addicts are frustrated because they too are not near their desktop very often during the working day…
Secretary Clinton, ... does not use standard computer equipment but relies exclusively on her Blackberry for e-mailing and remaining in contact on her schedule, etc.  
Blackberry security waivers were issued during the tenure of former Secretary of State of State Condoleezza Rice, 
use expanded to an unmanageable number of users from a security perspective, so those waivers were phased out  
Some news pundits suggest that Clinton's use of her own private email server was an effort to  avoid public records laws.

Myself, I see this as just the most prominent BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) event.   (Well, actually, Obama's Blackberry is probably even more prominent.)

I see the NSA acting like "Mordac, the Preventer of Information Services" in the Dilbert cartoons: "Security is more important than usability."

Actually...  I am sympathetic to NSA folks who said to Clinton et al "No, we don't have the resources to secure a smart phone".   BYOD is hard. But Clinton wasn't asking for BYOD (Bring Your [Her] Own Device).   She was just asking for a device that she could carry around to do her work.)  There's a moral here:
if IT cannot provide IT services in a form factor the user wants, smart users will often find a way to avoid IT's proscriptions.

Judicial Watch says
“These documents show that Hillary Clinton knew her Blackberry wasn’t secure.  Then why did she use it to access classified information on her illicit email server?”
Myself, I have long been in the same situation.  I usually err on the side on being too compliant with IT rules - but as a result I am hamstrung in my work.  I often find myself unable to read email for days, sometimes weeks, because I just cannot stomach the IT approved email clients, which are much less efficient.

My own experience leads me to suspect that there may be an aspect to this email 'scandal' that is not disclosed in the emails:

The last time I went through this sort of IT discussion, seeking permission to read company email on my iPhone, I was told, by one of the heads of company IT security, no less:

1) The official IT policy does not allow you to read email on your iPhone

2)  But...  You should go ahead and do it anyway.  We don't actively prevent it.   I read my own company email on my personal, non-approved, iPhone [said the company IT guy].

I can't help but wonder if the same conversation occurred in the hallways of the State Department or NSA.  Or outside.   Not on email.   Unrecorded.

Or perhaps there was just plain wishful thinking:
  • No previous US Secretary of State has used a .gov email account.  
  • Not the two most recent SoS's under a Republican administration  Colin Powell, not Condoleezza Rice  
  • Lots of US government employees use their personal email accounts. 
  • Those guys use commercial services like Gmail - at least we [Clinton's team] will try to be a bit more secure, by using a private email server.
I am sure they would not ask permission - after all, when they asked permission earlier they were rebuffed. "It is better to ask forgiveness than to seek permission".   After all, if the US government folks in charge of security were serious, surely they would have monitored and detected a lot of email from .gov addresses going to Clinton's non .gov email address?

I am not condoning this.   But I can understand it.   I don't do this myself.  But I have thought about doing it, when frustrated by corporate IT.   (By the way, I suspect that Gmail is more secure than any email server I would set up, or at least has professionals monitoring, and is probably more secure than my company's IT department.   But I am sure that Google can read all Gmail, unless encrypted, and that using any such commercial email service is an even bigger violation of official secrets acts that using a personal email server.   Using the former, you know that non-approved individuals can read your email; using the latter, you don't know - although they may be able to if they break in.)

Friday, March 25, 2016

AlternateLambdaSyntax - Python Wiki

It's fun to see the Python guys thrashing over lambda syntax.  Eventually Guido gave in and kept the historic lambda syntax.



AlternateLambdaSyntax - Python Wiki: "AlternateLambdaSyntax"



'via Blog this'



I must admit, I find the Python lambda syntax a bit unpleaasant:



Ordinary function

def foo(x):
      return x+1
Lambda

lambda  x: x+1
It is a pity thaat Pythin's lambdaas are not multiline:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1233448/no-multiline-lambda-in-python-why-not



This seems to be aa consequence of Python not being indentation sensitive inside parens.



I think that it is also a pity that Python's lambdas are strictly anonymous - although you can assign them a named variable.



I personally often use lambdas not just for anonymous functions, but also for named functions that I want to define near point of use, in the narrowest scope possible.



Even if they could be a lambda, naming them gives nicer stack traces.


Thursday, March 10, 2016

Amusing:

Blogger.com reports that the Chrome browser on iOS is unsupported.

Both are Google, right?

It is increasingly obvious that Google's blogger / blogspot platforms are not well supported, even by Google.

Annoyingly, I chose to use Google products such as blogger and plus/circles because I figured that Google was less likely to evaporate than so many other web.here-today-gone-tomorrow.COMpanies. But since Google has started seriously deprecating so many old apps, this heuristic applies much less.

Still... Google has so far been pretty good about warning and giving time to migrate when they remove a service.  If only those emails were not classified as unimportant or spam - by Gmail.  ;-}

I need to script up a cron job to periodically back up all of my Google  state. To avoid the rush when they deprecate a service.


swipe to archive on message in reading pane, not just in message list

Currently the Microsft Outlook app for iPhone has configurable swipes in the message list. This is good.

But in the reading panel, where you can actually see the message contents, the swipe actions are hardwired - scroll in conversation, or go to next conversation. This is less good.

I am a big fan of apps like Zero.app and Triage.app, that allow me to do my most common actions via swipes when I am looking at a screen where much of the message can be read - more than the preview in the message list.

My most common actions are read, dispose of (I archive, not delete), or skip and move to next/previous.

It is easier to swipe, eg swipe up, to archive, which I can do in Triage and Zero, than it is to poke the archive icon. Especially than to poke the tiny icon on my iPhone screen (easier on my iPad), when using Outlook.app in landscape mode with list and reading panes side by side. Or to swipe the current message in the message list (which, by the way, is hard to tell apart from the other messages - you should have a better color scheme. I often end up at giving the wrong message when I have to go back to the message list)

Much easier to swipe than it is to switch back to list on another screen, in portrait mode.

In portrait mode, you should be able to swipe to archive or move on, right on the message which occupies most of the screen.

Think about it: the most frequent operations need to be the easiest to do.  Or, the classic GUI / UI / UX principle of direct manipulation: if I want to archive a message, I want to manipulate it directly, in the message reading panel, not indirectly, in the message list (which may be on a different screen)

In fact, I had completely given up on Outlook.app, and have been using only Zero.app, because I found that I could process my email much faster in Zero.app. Typically one swipe per message in Zero.  But, by my count, 4 taps or swipes in Outlook.app

The only reason I am trying out Outlook.app again are

1) my company no longer allows IMAP access to our Exchange server, so I can no longer use Zero.app for work email, only personal

2) I bought an iPad mini, where tapping to archive button is less error prone.





Along the way: even with the current inefficient interface, I want to be able to archive and move on to view the next message. The current interface in landscape mode often shows a blank message reading pane after I archive, requiring me to painfully select a new message to look at.

You really need to count the number of actions - pokes, clicks, taps, swipes - to get the job of processing email done.   Swipes are about 2x better, or half the cost, of poking or tapping an icon or widget.  Switching screens is about 2x worse than tapping an icon, 4x worse than a swipe. Simple swipes left / right / up / down are fastest; long vs short swipes are almost as good, maybe 10-20% worse than a simple swipe; multiple buttons, one of which must be tapped, is maybe 50% worse, but still better than having to tap an icon or widget that may be far away (the swipe equivalent of context menus)